DOCSLIB.ORG

Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study US Army Corps of Engineers Portland District Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study DRAFT Integrated Feasibility Report and Environmental Assessment November 2017 Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study Executive Summary The Willamette River basin is located entirely within the state of Oregon, beginning south of Cottage Grove, and extending approximately 187 miles to the north where the Willamette River flows into the Columbia River. The basin is more than 11,200 square miles, averages 75 miles in width, and encompasses approximately 12 percent of the total area of the state (Figure ES-1). Within the watershed are most of the state’s population (nearly 70 percent), larger cities, and major industries. The basin also contains some of Oregon’s most productive agricultural lands and supports nationally and regionally important fish and wildlife species. Thirteen of Oregon’s thirty-six counties intersect or lie within the boundary of the Willamette River basin. Through a series of Flood Control Acts the U.S. Congress authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to construct, operate, and maintain thirteen major dams1 in the Willamette River basin. Collectively, these dams, reservoirs and associated infrastructure are known as the Willamette Valley Project (WVP). With a combined conservation storage capacity of approximately 1,590,000 acre-feet, the WVP is capable of providing important benefits for flood damage reduction, navigation, hydropower, irrigation, municipal and industrial water supply, flow augmentation for pollution abatement and improved conditions for fish and wildlife, and recreation. Feasibility Study History The Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study began in 1996 to investigate future Willamette River basin water demand. In 1999, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) listed the bull trout as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In 1999, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) listed both the Upper Willamette River (UWR) spring Chinook salmon and the UWR winter-run steelhead as threatened species. The ongoing effects on these ESA-listed fish from the continued operation of the WVP were the subject of formal Section 7 consultation under the ESA. The feasibility study was put on hold in 2000 pending resolution of ESA consultation (detailed below). The feasibility study was re-initiated in 2015 with the goal of reallocating WVP conservation storage for the benefit of ESA-listed fish (F&W), agricultural irrigation (AI), and municipal and industrial (M&I) water supply, while continuing to fulfill other project purposes. The study documented in this integrated Feasibility Report and Environmental Assessment analyzes current water uses in the basin for F&W, M&I, and AI, provides projections of water needs for these three project purposes, and develops a combined conservation storage reallocation and water management plan that would provide the most public benefit within the policies and regulations of the Corps and the state of Oregon. The non-federal sponsor for the feasibility study is the Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD). 1 Construction completion dates: Fern Ridge (1941), Cottage Grove (1942), Dorena (1949), Big Cliff (1953), Detroit (1953), Lookout Point (1954), Dexter (1954), Hills Creek (1961), Cougar (1963), Fall Creek (1966), Foster (1968), Green Peter (1968); Blue River (1969). Draft Feasibility Report & Environmental Assessment Page i Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study Figure ES-1 Willamette River Basin and Reservoir Projects Draft Feasibility Report & Environmental Assessment Page ii Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study Willamette Valley Project Stored Water In the state of Oregon, water law distinguishes between diverting water for storage, and releasing water from storage for use; each requires a different water right. In Oregon, the right to store water conveys ownership of the stored water. Because national policy prohibits the Corps from holding state water rights, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has held two Oregon water storage rights on behalf of the federal government for all WVP conservation storage since construction of the WVP was completed. Importantly, Reclamation’s state water rights that allow the federal government to store water in WVP reservoirs were designated exclusively for irrigation. Given this limitation, OWRD would not grant a secondary water right to use WVP stored water to other potential water use categories (e.g., M&I, F&W). In order for non-irrigation use categories (e.g., M&I, F&W) to realize benefits from the reallocation of WVP conservation storage, Reclamation’s storage rights need to undergo a transfer review process to change the character of use to reflect uses other than irrigation. Of the 1,590,000 acre-feet of WVP conservation storage, approximately 75,000 acre- feet of stored water (roughly five percent of total WVP conservation storage) is currently contracted through Reclamation for irrigation. If Reclamation does not file a transfer application for a change in character of use, OWRD cannot grant secondary water rights for the use of WVP stored water for either F&W benefits or M&I peak season water supply. Endangered Species Act Consultation In 2000, the Portland District submitted a Biological Assessment (BA) to the NMFS and USFWS (i.e., “the Services”) to assess the effects of ongoing operation and maintenance of the WVP on ESA-listed species. Because of their coordinated decision-making relative to WVP operation, the BA also identified Reclamation and Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) as Action Agencies. The BA evaluated the likely effects of the continued operation of the WVP on ESA-listed fish and their critical habitat. The proposed action contained in the 2000 BA was based on operation of the WVP prior to the ESA-listing of UWR spring Chinook salmon and winter-run steelhead in 1999. The Action Agencies prepared a revision to the proposed action and a supplement to the 2000 BA, and submitted a Supplemental BA in May 2007. The Supplemental BA included a revised proposed action that would more accurately reflect then-current WVP operations, particularly mainstem and tributary flow modifications implemented after preparation of the 2000 BA. Importantly, the Supplemental BA identified new measures that the Action Agencies have the authority to implement, which include: Changes to WVP reservoir management implemented subsequent to the 2000 BA, including mainstem and tributary minimum flow objectives; Completion of the selective withdrawal tower at Cougar Dam and actions underway to address fish passage and related issues at Cougar and Blue River dams under the Willamette Temperature Control Project; Strategies for reform of fish hatchery operations and associated mitigation; Habitat restoration actions undertaken on project lands through natural resources stewardship responsibilities, as well as offsite under the Corps General Investigation Program and Continuing Authorities Program; Draft Feasibility Report & Environmental Assessment Page iii Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study Evaluation of the potential feasibility and effectiveness of proposed major structural modifications at WVP dams to address ESA issues, including improved fish passage and handling, temperature control, and hatchery facilities at WVP dams other than Blue River and Cougar; Strategies for integration of operational, structural, habitat, and hatchery measures across the basin that enhance their effectiveness and take advantage of synergies that may exist; and Update and accurately describe implementation of the ongoing research, monitoring, and evaluation program, including a comprehensive program plan that better meets ESA requirements. The Services provided the Action Agencies with their final Biological Opinions (BiOps) in 2008, addressing the effects of WVP operation and maintenance on ESA-listed fish. The NMFS BiOp concluded that the proposed action described in the Supplemental BA caused jeopardy to the ESA-listed UWR Chinook and winter-run steelhead, and included a “reasonable and prudent alternative” (RPA). The USFWS BiOp concluded that the proposed action did not cause jeopardy to the ESA-listed bull trout as long as the RPA from the NMFS BiOp was implemented. Implementing the RPA would minimize possible adverse effects on ESA-listed fish and their critical habitat, and require monitoring and reporting to ensure compliance. It was anticipated that the recommendations in the BiOp would include the use of WVP stored water to meet flow objectives for the Willamette River mainstem and its major tributaries. Since water year 2000, the Corps has adopted and implemented mainstem Willamette River flow objectives at Salem based on recommendations from NMFS and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. From 2000 through 2003, the Corps worked with other federal and state agencies to develop a WVP flow management strategy. This strategy established a continuing framework for meeting both mainstem and tributary flow objectives that relies on monthly meetings and regular coordination teleconferences to provide updates on reservoir and flow conditions in the Willamette River and its tributaries. Implementation of the flow management strategy has resulted in the WVP being operated to meet tributary and mainstem flow objectives to the maximum extent possible for more than 15 years. Purpose and Need for Corps Action The purpose for Corps action is
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2019 Oregon Administrative Rules Compilation
    2019 OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES COMPILATION CHAPTER 736 Parks and Recreation Department Published By DENNIS RICHARDSON Secretary of State Copyright 2019 Office of the Secretary of State Rules effective as of January 01, 2019 DIVISION 1 PROCEDURAL RULES 736-001-0000 Notice of Proposed Rules 736-001-0005 Model Rules of Procedure 736-001-0030 Fees for Public Records DIVISION 2 ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITIES 736-002-0010 State Park Cooperating Associations 736-002-0015 Working with Donor Organizations 736-002-0020 Criminal Records Checks 736-002-0030 Definitions 736-002-0038 Designated Positions: Authorized Designee and Contact Person 736-002-0042 Criminal Records Check Process 736-002-0050 Preliminary Fitness Determination. 736-002-0052 Hiring or Appointing on a Preliminary Basis 736-002-0058 Final Fitness Determination 736-002-0070 Crimes Considered 736-002-0102 Appealing a Fitness Determination 736-002-0150 Recordkeeping, Confidentiality, and Retention 736-002-0160 Fees DIVISION 3 WILLAMETTE RIVER GREENWAY PLAN 736-003-0005 Willamette River Greenway Plan DIVISION 4 DISTRIBUTION OF ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLE FUNDSTO PUBLIC AND PRIVATELY OWNED LANDMANAGERS, ATV CLUBS AND ORGANIZATIONS 736-004-0005 Purpose of Rule 736-004-0010 Statutory Authority 736-004-0015 Definitions 736-004-0020 ATV Grant Program: Apportionment of Monies 736-004-0025 Grant Application Eligibility and Requirements 736-004-0030 Project Administration 736-004-0035 Establishment of the ATV Advisory Committee 736-004-0045 ATV Operating Permit Agent Application and Privileges 736-004-0060
    [Show full text]
  • Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study
    US Army Corps of Engineers Portland District Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study DRAFT Integrated Feasibility Report and Environmental Assessment November 2017 Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study Executive Summary The Willamette River basin is located entirely within the state of Oregon, beginning south of Cottage Grove, and extending approximately 187 miles to the north where the Willamette River flows into the Columbia River. The basin is more than 11,200 square miles, averages 75 miles in width, and encompasses approximately 12 percent of the total area of the state (Figure ES-1). Within the watershed are most of the state’s population (nearly 70 percent), larger cities, and major industries. The basin also contains some of Oregon’s most productive agricultural lands and supports nationally and regionally important fish and wildlife species. Thirteen of Oregon’s thirty-six counties intersect or lie within the boundary of the Willamette River basin. Through a series of Flood Control Acts the U.S. Congress authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to construct, operate, and maintain thirteen major dams1 in the Willamette River basin. Collectively, these dams, reservoirs and associated infrastructure are known as the Willamette Valley Project (WVP). With a combined conservation storage capacity of approximately 1,590,000 acre-feet, the WVP is capable of providing important benefits for flood damage reduction, navigation, hydropower, irrigation, municipal and industrial water supply, flow augmentation for pollution abatement and improved conditions for fish and wildlife, and recreation. Feasibility Study History The Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study began in 1996 to investigate future Willamette River basin water demand.
    [Show full text]
  • WIN Quarterly: Summer 2020
    WIN Quarterly: Summer 2020 Greetings, friends and colleagues, I hope you all had a relaxing weekend. It sure felt a little different, this year! The relative calm of the holiday gave me a chance to think about what Independence Day means to me, how that may differ from others and a chance to finish working through my thoughts about Juneteenth. We just declared Juneteenth a holiday at CPRCD and, considering current events, it felt weird to take a day off for the holiday. Ultimately, I did what many privileged white folk do and I donated some money to a charity and went about my day (HBCU Foundation). I instantly felt guilty and knew I needed to do better, so I'm working on that. When congress passed the Lee Resolution on July 2nd, 1776 I would bet that few foresaw another seven years of war with the British. Similarly, I can only imagine that people of color in the United States did not anticipate their fight to continue for another 155 years after Major General Gordon Granger read General Order No. 3 in Galveston on June 19th, 1865. For my whole life, I've celebrated an independence from a "tyranny" I never experienced. What I've really celebrated was my privilege. In fact, I would've been on the other side as my great grandfathers and great uncles were generals for the British Army; one of the former leading numerous decimations of the Americans during the Revolutionary War until being crushed at Yorktown; one of the latter leading the British to victory at the Battle of Alexandria.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses Spring 6-8-2017 Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed Alexander Cameron Nagel Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Geography Commons, Hydrology Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Nagel, Alexander Cameron, "Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed" (2017). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4012. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.5896 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed by Alexander Cameron Nagel A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geography Thesis Committee: Heejun Chang, Chair Geoffrey Duh Paul Loikith Portland State University 2017 i Abstract This study conducts a dam-scale cost versus benefit analysis in order to explore the feasibility of each the 13 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) commissioned dams in Oregon’s Willamette River network. Constructed between 1941 and 1969, these structures function in collaboration to comprise the Willamette River Basin Reservoir System (WRBRS). The motivation for this project derives from a growing awareness of the biophysical impacts that dam structures can have on riparian habitats. This project compares each of the 13 dams being assessed, to prioritize their level of utility within the system.
    [Show full text]
  • Response to Watershed Analysis Amendment Request
    Upper Middle Fork Watershed Analysis Update Response to the Watershed Analysis Amendment Request Listed below are analysis and responses provided by the Middle Fork District to issues/concerns listed in the U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service November, 1996. In this portion of the analysis amendment, the original issue is listed, as stated by the Fish and Wildlife Service. Following this, the key question and issue from the 1996 Watershed Analysis is stated. Below each key question is the scientific, analytical, and professional response to these issues. In some cases the issue presented by the Fish and Wildlife Service do not related to the key issues presented in the original watershed analysis. In these situations a new key question is developed. For the most part, the original key questions are still valid with minor changes. Listed below are the eleven aquatic habitat condition concerns. Eleven Listed Aquatic Concerns 1. Identify and map important bull trout rearing and spawning habitat, as well as current and future re-introduction sites, and potential future distribution down to Hills Creek Reservoir – if this information is known or available. Functional Relationship – Bull Trout Habitat Historical references indicate that bull trout Salvelinus confluentus in Oregon were once distributed throughout 12 basins in the Klamath River and Columbia River systems. Bull trout were probably found throughout the Willamette Basin, however available documentation is limited (Buchanan et al. 1997). Bull trout in the upper Middle Fork Willamette Watershed likely ranged throughout the mainstem Middle Fork Willamette and associated larger tributaries (Figure 1-1, Historic Bull Trout Distribution Map).
    [Show full text]
  • Hills Creek-Lookout Point Final EA
    In cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service Hills Creek-Lookout Point Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Bonneville Power Administration DOE/EA-1967 June 2017 __________________________________________________________________________________ This document is the final environmental assessment (EA) for the proposed Hills Creek-Lookout Point Transmission Line Rebuild Project (Project). Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) prepared this document as an abbreviated final EA because there have been no substantial changes to the Proposed Action, alternatives, or environmental analysis presented in the draft EA. This abbreviated final EA provides changes made to the text of the draft EA, as well as comments received on the draft EA and BPA’s responses to those comments. This final EA should be used as a companion document to the draft EA (DOE/EA-1967, dated August 2016), which contains the full text describing the project, its potential environmental impacts, and mitigation measures to reduce impacts. The draft EA is available on the project webpage at http://www.bpa.gov/goto/HillsCreekLookoutPoint. Summary BPA proposes to rebuild its Hills Creek-Lookout Point transmission line, which runs from Oakridge to Lowell in Lane County, Oregon. The existing 26-mile-long 115-kilovolt (kV) transmission line is aging, and BPA proposes to replace its wood-pole structures and other line components and improve its road system that provides access to the line. BPA released the draft EA for public comment on August 10, 2016; the comment period ran until September 19, 2016. The draft EA describes the Project, its potential environmental impacts, and mitigation measures to reduce those impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Wise 2009
    November LAKE WISE 2009 Editor: Roger Edwards A Voice for Quiet Waters The Oregon Lakes Association Newsletter Some Highlights from the Lincoln City Conference Rotating the site of OLA’s annual conference to different regions of Oregon each year provides attendees the chance to move beyond areas of their normal travels. Wherever the destination happens to be, the meeting produces serious discussions of lake topics, and the opportunity to greet old friends and meet new ones in a low key setting. This expectation was achieved again at Lincoln City last September. We were made to feel very welcome in Lincoln City, on the very first time OLA has met there. The resources we needed were conveniently near-by and handily served our purpose. Holding a lake meeting just steps away from a lake was a real bonus. Some of the vendors were demonstrating their instruments outside of the exhibit hall, where views of Devils Lake diverted attention from the sound of pounding surf from across Hwy 101. Inside, the full agenda of posters and presentations was divided between lake researchers, regulators, and enthusiasts, more-or-less paralleling the makeup of those in attendance. Everyone likely had a different impression of the day’s events, but the Board was universally pleased with this year’s Conference. It attracted well over a dozen new members, who will take our viewpoints to new locations, and who may seek a future position on the OLA Board. Some of these new members have affiliations with Oregon State University and extending our membership network there is a welcome development.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 State(S): Oregon Recovery Unit Name: Willamette River
    Chapter 5 State(s): Oregon Recovery Unit Name: Willamette River Recovery Unit Region 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed necessary to recover and protect listed species. Plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and, in this case, with the assistance of recovery unit teams, contractors, State and Tribal agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views or the official positions or indicate the approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Recovery plans represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Director or Regional Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature Cited: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Chapter 5, Willamette River Recovery Unit, Oregon. 96 p. In: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Draft Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Two working groups are active in the Willamette River Recovery Unit: the Upper Willamette (since 1989) and Clackamas Bull Trout Working Groups. In 1999, these groups were combined, and, along with representation from the Santiam subbasin, comprise the Willamette River Recovery Unit Team.
    [Show full text]
  • DOGAMI Open-File Report O-76-05, Preliminary Report on The
    PRELIMINARY REPORT ON THE RECONNAISSANCE GEOLOGY OF THE UPPER CLACKAMAS AND NORTH SANTIAM RIVERS AREA, CASCADE RANGE, OREGON by Paul E. Hammond Geologist Portland, Oregon July 1976 DRAFT COpy TABLE OF CONTENT S Summary of Main Geologic Findings . i" ~o~ s~, t- ,'j > <:},. Preliminary Evaluation of Geothermal Resource~ti~ ~ Introdul:tion Objectlves Accessibility Method of Mapping Rock Nomenclature Rock Units Introduction Western Cascade Group Beds at Detroit (Td) Breitenbush Tuff (Tbt) Nohorn Formation (Tnh) Bull Creek Beds (Tbc) Outerson Formation (To) Cub Point Formation (Tcp) Gordan Peak Formation (Tgp) Columbia River Basalt (Ter) Rhododendron Formation (Tr) Cheat Creek Beds (Tee) Scar Mountain Beds (sm) Miscellaneous Lava Flows: Vitrophyric Basalt of Lost Creek (TIc) Vitrophyric Andesite of Coopers and Boulder Ridges (Tcbr) Intrusive Rocks Trout Creek Vitrophyre (Titc) Basalt Dikes and Plugs (Tib) Hornblende Andesite (Tiha) Pyroxene Andesite (Tipa) Pyroxene Diorite (Tlpd) Possible Ouaternary Intrusions (Ql) High Cascade Group Older High Cascade Volcanic Rocks (OTb) Younger High Cascade Volcanic Rocks (Qb) Mount Jefferson Volcanic Deposits (OJ) Surficial Depo.its Glacial Deposits (f(jt, Qjo; Qst I Qso) Landslides (Qls) Talus (Qts) Alluvium (Qal) Structure Introduction Folds Faults Some General Observations High Cascade Graben or Volcano-Tectonic Depression Arching of the Cascade Range References - 1 - SUMMARY OF MAIN GEOLOGIC FINDINGS The upper Clackamas and North Santiam River area, covering about 635 square miles (1645 sq. km.) lies in the northwestern part of the Cascade Range, just west of Mount Jefferson. The area is underlain by over 20,000 feet (6100 m.) of volcanic strata of the probable upper part of the western Cascade Volcanic Group.
    [Show full text]
  • Lookout Point Watershed Analysis Update
    Lookout Point Watershed Analysis Update August, 2012 Introduction The Lookout Point Watershed Analysis was prepared by personnel of the old Lowell Ranger District in 1997, so this analysis is now about 15 years old. In that time considerable new information has come to light and some conditions have changed. Additionally, the original WA contained some misinformation, or the watershed conditions are better understood now. There is also a new land management project proposed in this watershed (the Outlook Landscape Diversity Project) the analysis of which would be facilitated by this watershed update. In addition to updating current conditions, this reanalysis updates the list of recommendations. Specific conditions or occurrences creating the need for this update include: • vegetation growth which has changed the conditions of the 28% of the watershed consisting of young stands created by past regeneration harvest, • a better understanding of the fire history of the area, • the presence of a new invasive plant species, false brome, • reintroduction of Chinook salmon and bull trout into upstream watersheds, • construction of additional infrastructure elements such as cell phone towers and fiber optic lines, and • continuing deterioration of road conditions. The 1997 “Lookout Pont Watershed Analysis Area” document covered only the 49,638 acres of federally owned lands within the 100,000+ acre Lookout Point Reservoir Fifth Field watershed, which is one of nine within the Fourth-Field Middle Fork of the Willamette River watershed. This update will also address only the National Forest portion of this watershed. Some 60,000 acres of BLM and privately owned lands occur in the lower portions of the full 5th Field watershed, which include the Lookout Point dam and the lower half of the associated reservoir, the Dexter dam and reservoir, the Lost Creek drainage, and the communities of Dexter and Lowell.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon State Parks
    iocuN OR I Hi ,tP7x OREGON STATE PARKS HISTORY 1917-1963 \STATE/ COMPILED by CHESTER H. ARMSTRONG JULY I. 1965 The actual date of the i is less than thirty years ag older, supported by a few o were an innovation as so lit The Oregon parks system o beautification advocated b: Governors, the early State ] neers. The records reveal out areas, made favorable were generous with their Roy A. Klein, State Highk& ary 29, 1932, as a leader wl The state parks system thought of highway beauti many highway users who h who could not well afford t] In the park story we fii the many influential people complete, it is necessary to thought or trend in the idea the thought of highway be, may see and follow the trai present state narks system. In the preparation of th $ been examined. It was neck ing to property acquisitions deeds and agreements. as tln records of the Parks Divisik Excellent information h; State Parks and Recreatioi A Public Relations Office. As many etbers. I Preface The actual date of the founding of the Oregon State Parks System is less than thirty years ago but the fundamental principles are much older, supported by a few of the leading park people of that time. They were an innovation as so little had been done by any state in the Union. The Oregon parks system owes its beginning to the thought of highway beautification advocated by many leaders of the state, including the Governors, the early State Highway Commissioners and Highway Engi- neers.
    [Show full text]
  • Angling Guide Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
    Angling Guide Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Alton Baker Park canoe canal: In Eugene by Autzen Stadium. Stocked in the spring with rainbow trout. A good place to take kids. Big Cliff Reservoir: 150 acres on the North Santiam River. The dam is located several miles below Detroit Dam off of Highway 22. Stocked with trout. Blue River Reservoir and Upper Blue River: 42 miles east of Eugene off Highway 126. Native cutthroat and rainbow. Stocked in spring and early summer with rainbow trout. USFS campground. Bond Butte Pond: 3 miles north of the Harrisburg exit on the east side of I-5 at MP 212 (the Bond Butte overpass). Channel catfish, largemouth bass, white crappie, bluegill. Carmen Reservoir: 65-acre reservoir located on Highway 126 appproximately 70 miles east of Springfield. Rainbow trout, cutthroat trout, brook trout. Clear Lake: 70 miles east of Eugene off Highway 126. Naturally reproducing brook trout and stocked with rainbow trout. Resort with restaurant, boat and cabin rentals. USFS campground. Cottage Grove Ponds: A group of 6 ponds totaling 15 acres. Located 1.5 miles east of Cottage Grove on Row River Road behind the truck scales. Largemouth bass, bluegill, bullhead. Rainbow trout are stocked into one pond in the spring. Cottage Grove Reservoir: Six miles south of Cottage Grove on London Road. Largemouth bass, brown bullhead, bluegill, cutthroat trout. Hatchery rainbow are stocked in the spring. USACE provides campgrounds. There is a health advisory for mercury contamination. Pregnant women, nursing women and children up to six years old should not eat fish other than stocked rainbow trout; children older than 6 and healthy adults should not eat more than 1/2 pound per week.
    [Show full text]